V CHANDRASEGARAN Vs. COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT UNION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 18. 4. 2000 made in W. P. No. 8130 of 1993, in and by which, the learned single Judge dismissed the said writ petition on the ground that he was appointed only as an N. M. R. Daily wage worker and he has no legal right to claim permanency.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the respondent-Panchayat Union.

(3.) FOR convenience, we shall refer the parties as described in the writ petition. According to the petitioner, in May 1985, he was appointed as an NMR Fitter in the respondent Panchayat Union. He worked as an NMR Fitter continuously for a period of five years. Having regard to the fact that the respondent Union was one which has more than 275 pumps, he was sponsored for appointment as an additional Fitter on a regular basis in the time scale of pay applicable to the post of Fitter. A proposal was sent in this regard by the respondentpanchayat Union to the District Collector through the Divisional development Officer. On the request of the Divisional Development Officer, the respondent-Panchayat Union passed a resolution resolving to appoint the petitioner as an Additional Fitter on a regular time scale of pay with effect from 1. 4. 1999. Based on the said resolution, the respondent-Panchayat Union, by an order dated 25. 4. 1990, appointed the petitioner as an Additional Fitter in the time scale of pay 950-20-1150 -25-1500 with effect from 1. 4. 1990. While so, suddenly, without any notice, the respondent-Panchayat Union has passed an order on 1. 4. 19 93 cancelling the appointment of the petitioner as additional Fitter after 31. 3. 1993. Questioning the same, viz. , the said order of the respondent is violative of principles of natural justice and patently illegal, the petitioner filed W. P. No. 8130 of 1993. The learned single Judge, by the impugned order, after finding that since the writ petitioner was only an NMR, has no right to claim permanency, dismissed the writ petition. Hence, the present writ appeal.